Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

beachmom

(15,239 posts)
3. Adding to this strain, Andrew Sullivan has a great post up
Tue Jan 8, 2013, 03:59 PM
Jan 2013
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2013/01/the-long-game.html


More and more, the second term is coming into focus. The nominations of Kerry, Hagel and Brennan in the national security tent confirms that Obama intends to make his mark more emphatically in his second term than his first (which primarily meant cleaning up the mess from Bush-Cheney). All three are skeptical of resorting to military force; Kerry is a veteran diplomat and decorated veteran; Hagel has two Purple Hearts and is ideally positioned to defend cuts in Pentagon spending. Brennan has the confidence of the CIA, even as he appears to be intent on bringing its often unaccountable actions more firmly into the nexus of law, and checks and balances. Of course, they should all be grilled by the Senate - on Iran, Greater Israel, torture, secrecy and Asia. But they seem like sterling and solid picks to me.


He goes on to discuss how Hagel is a great choice if you want the defense budget cut, something that really needs to happen. Look at the defense budget toward the end of the post -- stunning how recklessly Bush spent!

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»John Kerry»In Chuck Hagel and John K...»Reply #3